My Titanic Find

Not open for further replies.
OK I was half-minded to say nothing about this but I have something quite interesting to talk about.

As I said on my intro thread I have been a Titanic watcher for longer than I care to think about but here's what I have.

A few weeks ago I acquired a possible Titanic document - which is shown below. I have researched the address thereon and of course it was the White Star Line offices in New York...

I am taking this to Aldridge's tomorrow to have it evaluated ( I spoke to Andrew today) - I am in two minds about whether to keep it or sell it but nevertheless the provenance is the main obstacle to any value.

I understand from the seller that the original owner passed it to his Great Grandfather during WWI. The person receiving it served in the Royal Air Corps (although I am sure that this might be slightly wrong and the new owner survived the war and passed it down to the last owner.) I know a number of survivors went on to serve in the war - most likely this link tends to move us towards crew or 2nd/3rd class male passengers.

Of course two things are clearly interesting here:
1. is it a genuine Titanic artefact
2. Who owned it (at the time)

I firmly believe having looked closely at it that it is genuine and of course the writing on it only makes sense in the context of the demise of RMS Titanic (why else write "9 Broadway New York on it... was it for a passenger or crew member... will we ever know!


Hi All,
Felt tip in 1912? Hmmm. Well, that would be a bit early as they were not introduced until the late 1940's. In 1952 they were glass tubes and felt (some with a "plunger" like a hypo)- very unusual and faded badly. They did not become practical and gain wide popularity until 1958-1962, about the time the "modern" felt tip was introduced. And many of these faded until more stable inks were developed. The letter formations seem unusual for 1912 as well. Of course, this could have been written on much later for some odd reason (although what would motivate someone to write on such an item in 1962 is beyond me, as what was written has no real meaning it makes one wonder...well, at least there is no ZIP code), but when taken into account with what Mr. Molony has pointed out I think this item has problems. Also, why did it close for only $97 if genuine? And, I believe that is much more a story and less a "PROVENance" (the word "proven" is there for a reason). One thing I did notice was a lack of a stated return policy. Do let us know what Mr. Aldridge says. Just my .02 - I have not examined the item.

Eric Longo

PS - Dimensions and paper fibre/sizing will also provide information. On older paper the size applied to control absorbency does not work as well, resulting in feathering when a new ink is applied. One would expect to see feathering were this an old item, even one signed by a finer felt tip pen then was available in 1958-1962 or so. Why someone would write on a genuine item still eldues me.
Thanks guys - especially for badgering the ingrate.

Spot on for both of you, I must say and Andrew was on the money and gave me an interesting and knowledgeable insight into the real McCoy (worth the trip for sure).

TBH it's not worth the aggro and I've just laughed it off - in a sense it's both a talking point and something I will just frame and be amused about - it just isn't worth the aggravation that following these things up results in.

I was somewhat sceptical it has to be said but in for a .01 (to use your words Eric) in for the whole 1.00 - OTOH Barnum was right (or was he - for every failure I have had I have 10 successes) and if you don't speculate you don't accumulate. Since the subject matter (if not this item) is close to my heart I can live with it...(and I had already made up my mind that barring some ridiculous luck financially I was likely to keep it anyway.

Will be contributing to other areas of the board when I get some more time.

All the best.
Not open for further replies.